評論
打印
We see it in the constant appearance of slang and jargon, of the historical change in languages,
我們看到俗語和術語不斷產生，歷史上語言在變化
in divergence of dialects and the formation of new languages.
方言在分支，新的語言在形成
So language is not so much a creator or shaper of human nature, so much as a window onto human nature.
所以語言并不只是創造、塑造人性之物，同樣是反映人性的窗口
In a book that I'm currently working on,
我正在寫的一本書中
I hope to use language to shed light on a number of aspects of human nature,
我希望能闡明人性的一些方面
including the cognitive machinery with which humans conceptualize the world
包括認知機能，人們靠這個把世界概念化
and the relationship types that govern human interaction.
還有掌管人類互動的各類關系。
And I'm going to say a few words about each one this morning.
今天早上，我將對它們逐一簡要介紹。
Let me start off with a technical problem in language that I've worried about for quite some time
讓我從一個語言中的技術性問題開始，我研究這個問題已經有一段時間了
and indulge me in my passion for verbs and how they're used.
希望你們能包涵一下，包涵我對動詞和它們用法的熱情
The problem is, which verbs go in which constructions?
問題在于，哪個動詞用于哪個構式？
The verb is the chassis of the sentence.
動詞是句子的基座，
It's the framework onto which the other parts are bolted.
其他部分都安在這個基座上。
Let me give you a quick reminder of something that you've long forgotten.
讓我提醒你們一下，這是你們早已忘記的東西。
An intransitive verb, such as "dine," for example, can't take a direct object.
不及物動詞，比如“用餐”，不能帶有直接的賓語
You have to say, "Sam dined," not, "Sam dined the pizza."
你得說：“山姆用餐了",而不是“山姆用餐了比薩餅”
A transitive verb mandates that there has to be an object there:
一個及物動詞要求必須有賓語：
"Sam devoured the pizza." You can't just say, "Sam devoured."
“山姆吞吃比薩餅”。你不能只是說“山姆吞吃”。
There are dozens or scores of verbs of this type, each of which shapes its sentence.
有許許多多這類的動詞，每個都塑造著句子。
